Purpose: The clinical question this systematic review aimed to answer was “What are the differences in outcomes of restored endodontically treated teeth compared to implant-supported restorations? Therefore the aim of this study was to use systematic review to compare the survival of compromised teeth restored with either root canal therapy followed by a crown, or placement of a single-tooth implant. Materials and Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed databases were searched for studies dealing with survival of single-tooth implants and restored endodontically treated teeth. A 2-step screening procedure was used to identify articles that met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Fifty-five studies related to single-tooth implants and 13 studies related to restored root canal–treated teeth were included. The endpoint analyzed in these studies was the survival rate of the treated tooth or implant. Results: The 95% confidence intervals for the pooled estimates for the single-tooth implants and restored endodontically treated teeth were found overlapping in forest plots for all follow-up periods. This indicated no significant differences in survival between restored root canal–treated teeth and single-tooth implants. Conclusions: The results of this systematic review indicate that the decision to treat a tooth endodontically or replace it with an implant must be based on factors other than the treatment outcomes of the procedures themselves. Both nonsurgical root canal therapy followed by an appropriate restoration and single-tooth implants are excellent treatment modalities for the treatment of compromised teeth. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007;22(suppl):96–116

Key words: restored root canal–treated teeth, single-tooth implants, survival of root canal–treated restored teeth, survival of single-tooth implants, systematic review